Wednesday, October 4, 2017

In Las Vegas, 59 people died and over 500 were wounded. It's hard to fathom how one man could kill and injure so many people in less than 10 minutes -- until you consider the weapons he had at hand, weapons that are legal to purchase almost anywhere in our nation.As America continues to reel from the horror unleashed in Las Vegas this week, remembers the victims and all the heroic acts of concert-goers saving each other, the picture of the shooter and his high-powered, military-style weaponry is becoming clearer.Searching the shooter's 32nd floor hotel room, investigators found 23 firearms, almost all of which were semi-auto assault rifles, along with high-capacity ammo magazines, sniper scopes, and thousands of rounds of ammunition. Searching the shooter's home, more firearms were found, as well as more ammunition and signs of explosives. In all, 47 firearms were discovered that had been in his possession.On many of the assault rifles, investigators found "bump-fire stocks." This is a very important point. What are bump stocks and why are they important?"Bump-fire" is a technique used by "gun enthusiasts" to fire semi-auto guns far faster, almost like a full-auto machine gun, by using the gun's recoil to cause their finger to hit the trigger in a rapid fashion. HERE is an example of someone bump firing an AK pistol."Bump-fire stocks" are similar, in that they are an accessory rifle stock (the back part of the gun that goes up against your shoulder) that is manufactured in such a way as to create the bump-fire action in an easier fashion. In the words of Senator Dianne Feinstein, “This replacement shoulder stock turns a semi-automatic rifle into a weapon that can fire at a rate of 400 to 800 rounds per minute." This in essence turns a semi-auto assault rifle, which is already high-powered, into nearly the equivalent of a fully automatic "machine gun." These also help get around strict gun regulations in California which are meant to prevent fully automatic rifle sales. Feinstein had introduced a bill in 2013 to ban bump-fire stocks, but the bill was defeated. In the wake of the Las Vegas shooting, she is looking to re-introduce the ban.The Mercury News released a very good article that describes in more detail how bump-fire stocks work.Here is a video of a gun manufacturer who is selling bump-fire stocks, as advertised during the 2013 SHOT Show in Las Vegas, ironically, in 2013. Note how fast the shots are fired with it with both an AR-15 and AK-47:[UPDATE: shortly after publishing this post, that video was taken down, so here is a different video demonstrating a comparable bump-fire stock in action] The narrator says "Once we really got the hang of this thing, it was a ton of fun. As you can see here, Brian is just rippin' through rounds here and really enjoying it!" then adds "It's cheap, it's only $100."

Here is another video, this time by a gun nut showing it off with his AK-47, calling the bump-fire stock a "real fun toy" (note that his little child is just off-camera, asking when he can have a turn):UPDATE: (As with the other videos I originally posted, this one was taken down soon after I published this blog post. -- it seems the gun guys aren't too keen on their ads for these bump fire stocks now that 59 people were killed and hundreds injured by a shooter with one.)HERE is another video that compares "the world's fastest shooter" to bump fire.Compare the rate of fire to the horrifying audio from the Las Vegas massacre. Rapid fire like that belongs on the battleground, not at a concert in Las Vegas. There were military veterans who died at the concert, who suffered from PTSD from their time overseas. Imagine the horror they felt as they heard rapid fire, here at home, which took the life of this Navy veteran, or this Marine who managed to survive and helped save the lives of others. “It was a mini war zone but we couldn’t fight back,” he said.Now imagine if a silencer (or "sound suppressor") had been used in addition. Due to the Las Vegas shooting, the House decided to delay a vote on a bill (deceptively called the SHARE Act, supposedly to help hunters) that would deregulate silencers, as well as armor-piercing ammo and other gun regulations.The shooter's weapons were not suppressed. Because of this, other hotel patrons heard the gunshots, like this guy two stories up, and were alarmed. When the police team searched for the shooter's room, the sound of the gunfire helped them find him (in addition to smoke alarms from the smoke created by the weapons during firing). One policeman stated, “I'm inside the Mandalay Bay on the 31st floor, I can hear the automatic fire coming from one floor ahead, one floor above us.” If the guns had had silencers on them, most hotel patrons beyond one room away likely wouldn't have known what was happening, and police would have had a harder time locating the shooter's room.Don't believe me? Consider the following video, where a gun enthusiast demonstrates his AR-15 assault rifle, complete with bump-fire stock, outfitted with a sound suppressor. He describes it as "very very quiet suppressor." Listen carefully and judge for yourself whether you would be able to hear it more than a couple rooms away:UPDATE: as with the first video in this post, this video was also taken down a day after I posted. So here is a different video with a bump-fire stock with and without a silencer. Compare the noise it produces. He doesn't even need ear protection:UPDATE: And now that link, too, has been taken off. YouTube decided that it doesn't meet their guidelines! Good for YouTube, honestly.

"Fun, fun!" he exclaims after firing. "Life is really good." He doesn't even need to wear ear plugs or any ear protection.And why would anyone need the bump-fire stocks? For the "Fun, fun!" of it, apparently, unless you're fending off a small army of invaders -- or trying to kill hundreds of concert-goers.It's time to ban these heinous devices and bring a new trajectory to our societies away from gun violence.UPDATE (10/5/17): House Republicans are considering voting on a bill to make bump-fire stocks illegal, introduced by Florida Republican Rep. Carlos Curbelo. From a CNN article:

The Florida Republican said his proposal would be a straight ban on bump stocks: "no one can have them, no one can make them, no one can transfer them." His approach mirrors a measure introduced by House Democrats on Wednesday.

UPDATE(10/5/17):Well, now here's a surprise! It must be the first time in two decades that the NRA is actually willing to support a form of stricter gun regulation! They are willing to support stricter regulation of bump-fire stocks.A statement from the NRA, from an article:

The group said: "Devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations." ....

The NRA called on Thursday for regulators to "immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law". ...

"In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented," NRA chiefs Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox wrote in the statement.

Does this mean that they will also support other means of rapid fire, such as "bullet buttons" or the sale of parts and books intended to make your own full-auto modifications, or 3D printed parts that do the same? I hope so. UPDATE (10/12/17): Eh, nevermind, says the NRA, they don't actually support a ban on them, just "further review" by the ATF, who can't regulate firearms *accessories* unless told to do so by a law passed by Congress. So, in other words, nothing will change if the NRA has it's way. Gee, what a surprise.Again, as with the GOP, I suspect that they are throwing the public a bone in the hopes that public outrage over this shooting can be quelled before further gun regulation is proposed.UPDATE(10/5/17): President Trump has also signaled that he would be willing to consider a ban on bump-fire stocks.

UPDATE (10/10/17): Not only are the gun nuts ashamed to the point of pulling their YouTube videos, but retailers are now pulling the bump-stocks off the market, even though there is demand. Good for them!

Monday, October 2, 2017

Ceasefire Oregon and Ceasefire Oregon Education Foundation are horrified by the mass shooting early this morning in Las Vegas. Recent reports suggest that 58 people were shot to death and more than 500 were injured after a gunman armed with military-style weaponry shot into a crowded concert audience in Las Vegas from a casino hotel balcony before shooting himself to death.

Ceasefire Oregon and the Ceasefire Oregon Education Foundation grieve for the fallen and the injured, and for their families and friends. We also grieve for our nation as we suffer from the deadliest mass shooting in our nation's history.

We call on all Americans to respect each other as fellow citizens and as human beings who are valued and cherished.

But respect and prayers are not enough.

Mass shootings of increasingly alarming numbers of killed and wounded continue to happen with no action from our federal legislators to stop the next one. We must have commonsense gun laws put in place to keep guns out of the hands of those who wish to do evil, and we must have a renewed ban against military-style weaponry designed for the battlefield.

Today, we are asking you to call your legislators to demand a ban on assault rifles, and to reject the SHARE Act which will deregulate silencers and make deadly firearms even easier to access. Find your legislator here. Say that you've had ENOUGH of the carnage. The only ones who are benefitting are the gun lobby and the politicians who are beholden to the NRA. Tell your legislators to ban assault rifles and vote NO on the SHARE Act.

Friday, July 7, 2017

Today the Oregon legislature passed SB 719, the Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) bill, which allows families and law enforcement to prevent tragedies by petitioning a court to temporarily suspend a person’s access to firearms and other dangerous weapons. The bill, cosponsored by Senator Boquist and Senator Burdick, is expected to be signed into law by Governor Kate Brown.

Oregonians now have an important tool to help reduce suicide, domestic violence, and shootings.

“People who are thinking of killing themselves or harming others often often show signs or declare their intentions well before committing the act. The first people to see those signs are often family members,” stated Joanne Skirving, president of Ceasefire Oregon. “An ERPO gives families and law enforcement a chance to intervene and perhaps prevent a tragedy. In Oregon, where suicide is 85% of all gunshot deaths, temporarily removing access to guns is especially important to prevent suicide.”

Washington state voters passed Initiative 14911, an ERPO law, in November 2016 by a 40 point margin (70% to 30%). Indiana and Connecticut2 also have versions of ERPO. In 2014, California passed AB 1014,3 called a Gun Violence Restraining Order, in response to a killing rampage earlier that year in Isla Vista.

Jenna Yuille of Americans for Responsible Solutions noted, “In 1999, Connecticut became the first state to pass a similar law and they've seen life-saving results. In the first 14 years of its implementation, police issued 762 orders, which helped save dozens of lives.4 We thank Senators Boquist and Burdick for their efforts to make ERPO a reality in Oregon.”

Once an ERPO has been filed, a court must find clear and convincing evidence that an individual is threatening harm to self or others, before the court can order the respondent to temporarily surrender any guns to the police. The respondent will not be able to buy, sell, or possess other firearms for a temporary period of time.

Penny Okamoto, executive director of Ceasefire Oregon explained the ERPO due process protections. “To protect the rights of the respondent, the bill establishes procedures for the respondent to request a hearing. The burden of proof is on the petitioner to show clear and convincing evidence.” Okamoto added, “ERPOs are not to be taken lightly. False applications of ERPO or violation of ERPO is punishable by one year’s imprisonment, $6,250 fine or both.”

Passage of this bill has been a bipartisan effort across Oregon.

“Oregon continues to show that we can move past partisanship to find common ground when it comes to gun safety,” said Oregon Alliance for Gun Safety President Jenn Lynch. “Building on our bipartisan work in 2015 to address the nexus between domestic violence and gun violence, this legislation shows how leaders can move past political posturing to find real solutions to make our communities safer.”

Friday, December 16, 2016

Oregon Firearms Federation (or "OFF", which bills themselves as "Oregon's only no-compromise gun lobby"), and their rabid executive director, Kevin Starrett, are no strangers to extremism. They lie, distort, and belittle in order to try to get their way. They are far worse than the NRA, and often accuse the NRA of being "too compromising." Any time there is even a hint of gun violence prevention bills, OFF immediately jumps to extreme conclusions and mobilizes against those horrible liberals comin' to take their gunzzz (This is the same group that has tried to pass bills to allow felons to be armed, to allow convicted drug offenders to carry concealed guns, and even to force schools at all levels to have mandatory gun classes for kids, among other extremist positions, and they have gleefully burnt effigies of the governor on the capital steps, marched through the capitol building with assault rifles, and stood behind gun violence victims in legislative hearings while sporting loaded handguns in open intimidation of those brave presenters).

The county commission of Lane County, here where I live, and where Val Hoyle's house district was located, was one of those commissions that passed such a resolution (you can read it HERE). In fact, they passed it AFTER the bill had been passed, which means that their statement that they would refuse to fund or enforce the law was a breach of their oath of office. Four of the five members of that commission are very conservative Republicans (and it was those four who voted for the resolution). Jay Bozievich signed the resolution on the commission's behalf. Lane County residents were overwhelmingly FOR Senate Bill 941, so Mr. Bozievich was going against the wishes of his constituents. Oh, how OFF crowed about that little victory (even though it did nothing to stop the law from being enacted)!

Well, there was a vote by the Lane County Commissioners this week, to decide if Hoyle would fill the Senate seat, or if it would be filled by another Democratic candidate named Jim Manning. OFF lobbied hard to flood the commission's email with anti-Hoyle emails, with the usual name-calling (they called her a "Bloomberg stooge," "Bloomberg's handmaiden," "anti-gun zealot," and other names, in part because Michael Bloomberg had given her a campaign donation). In the end, Manning was voted into the position instead of Hoyle (the vote was 3-2 for Manning), so OFF celebrated and claimed the victory as their own. Jay Bozievich was one of the two votes for Hoyle. According to an article, very few of the deluge of emails from the gun guys were from constituents who actually lived in Hoyle's district, and the emails didn't affect the commissioner's decisions.

But, as usual, the extremist comments from OFF and its supporter soured their own reputation with the politicians they inundated.

The reason I'm laughing is because OFF posted a statement from Jay Bozievich on their Facebook page, in response to the recent vote against Hoyle. See a screenpic of that posting, to the right.

That's right: the very Republican far-right commissioner, who signed a resolution against background checks on their behalf, is sick of OFF's extremism and has let them know, in no uncertain terms, that they are a "non entity that does not have any real power."

Bozievich was correct. OFF is destructive to their own cause. Every time they send out their email alerts or open their mouths in hearings, OFF proudly displays their extremism for all to see.

Thursday, November 10, 2016

The shocking outcome of the presidential election leaves many unanswered questions about what steps will be taken in the next four years at the presidential level to reduce gun violence. (CBS compiled a list of Donald Trump's policy proposals.) Ceasefire Oregon Action Fund and our sister organizations will continue to work at the national and state level to reduce gun violence.

-Washington overwhelmingly (71% to 29%) passed I-1491 which allows families of people in crisis to ask a judge to issue an extreme-risk protection order to temporarily prevent a loved one from having access to firearms.

-Nevada passed Question 1 which requires background checks for almost all firearm sales.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Right now is a great time to ask the candidates questions about their positions on gun safety.

Do you believe gun violence is a problem in Oregon?

Fact: In 2014 alone, 497 Oregonians lost their lives to gun violence.1

Fact: Over 85% of guns deaths in Oregon are suicides.1

Fact: Just last year, Oregon suffered from our deadliest school shooting yet. (Umpqua Community College, Roseburg)

Fact: Gunshot wound was a predominant mechanism of death in the incidents of IPV-related homicide.2

Do you support an assault weapons ban?3,4

Do you support legislation to limit firearm magazine capacity to 10 or fewer bullets? (Oregon's cartridge limit is five when hunting large game.)5,6

Would you support a law that requires safe storage for firearms?7

Do you believe people should be required to complete training before they can buy a firearm? (Training could include accurate shooting, gun safety and safe storage, conflict de-escalation, and/or anger management.)

How would you improve Oregon’s mental health system to help reduce the suicide rate by firearm?8

What will you do to reduce gun violence?

Increase standards of gun ownership.9

Require secure storage for all firearms.

Require research into gun violence in Oregon.

Close the Charleston Loophole.10

Call or email your candidates or elected officials today. Ask them the questions listed above and request a reply. Be sure to tell them you're a voter in their district!Thanks for your work to prevent gun violence.

Featured Quote:

From the D.C. v. Heller Supreme Court Decision:

"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."